ABOUT
Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Written by EWG staff.
DONATE TO EWG!
Help us protect your health and environment! Please donate $5 to EWG today.
GET EWG'S TIPS & ACTION ALERTS
Sign Up here to receive email updates and tips from EWG and stay informed on the issues that matter most to you.
ENVIROBLOG VIA EMAIL
Support the 2010 Safe Cosmetics Act. It's Urgent.
Being Clean and Pretty Has Toxic Costs
Test your knowledge of cosmetics safety: 8 myths debunked
SEARCH ENVIROBLOG
FEATURED
Support the 2010 Safe Cosmetics Act. It's Urgent.
Why, oh why is there plastic in my aluminum water bottle?
Cell phone radiation series - Part 2: 8 Ways to reduce your exposure
Test Your Knowledge of Cosmetics Safety: 8 Myths Debunked
EWG's Tips for Parents: The Series
EWG's Tips to avoid BPA exposure
EWG on TV
Cutting the Pork from U.S. Farm Bill
Sunscreen safety & DC drinking water
Perchlorate in people, kids' personal care products & plastics, and sunscreen
BPA in baby formula & safe cosmetics
What can I do about fluoride in my water?
What is new carpet treated with? What can I do?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?
PEOPLE TALKING TOXICS
TALK TO US
Did we miss something? Email Enviroblog.
Head back to school with EWG's green shopping tips
Every year around this time, the school supply list shows up in our mailbox.
You know the one, where teachers tell you exactly what to bring on the first day to fill the new classroom with the necessities that don't last from year to year and aren't provided by the school. Sometimes they even specify brand names!
But that doesn't stop some of us from asking whether the items on the list are safe for our children, or how we can pick the safest - and greenest - options.
Which is exactly why EWG put together some back-to-school shopping tips this year. To make it easier on us parents to make safer choices, without spending every waking minute doing product research! We focused on these 11 common product types that children often use (and parents are asked to buy) at school:
1. Art supplies
Many contain toxic chemicals that are not suitable for children -- especially younger ones. Pay special attention to these: Paints should be water-based to avoid solvents and colored with natural, non-metal pigments.
Don't buy polymer clays that stay soft at room temperature or can be hardened in a home oven -- they're made from PVC (polyvinyl chloride) and often contain phthalates. Consider making your own "clay" out of common baking ingredients instead. Note: A label that says "Conforms to ASTM D-4236" simply means the product is labeled as required, not necessarily safe.
2. Crayons & markers
Common crayons often contain paraffin wax, which is made from crude oil. Look for alternatives like soy and beeswax. Don't buy dry-erase and permanent markers, which contain solvents. Be wary of plastic-encased crayons or scented markers -- scents encourage kids to sniff them, and the chemicals used in the fragrances are not listed on the label. Try a pencil highlighter instead of the familiar plastic ones.
3. Glue
Try to minimize kids' exposures to extra-strong or instant adhesives like epoxies, model and "super" glues; they contain toxic solvents. Water-based glues are safer bets, though most are made from petrochemicals. Some better options are: glue sticks, white/yellow/clear "school" glue. Stock up today. Children should not use rubber cement.
4. Hand washing
Choose sanitizers with ethanol (ethyl alcohol) but no fragrance, and liquid hand soaps without triclosan, triclocarban or fragrance. Check this product list in EWG's Cosmetics Database. And remember: Plain soap and water is often just as effective! Learn more in our Healthy Home Tip.
5. Backpacks
If it's time for a new one, look for natural fibers and skip those made with PVC. If natural fibers aren't an option, polyester and nylon are better than PVC. (Check the label for #3, the symbol for PVC, or look for "no PVC" on the label.) Labels don't always list the material, so you may need to contact manufacturers or visit their websites.
6. Lunch boxes
Because they hold food, it's especially important that lunch boxes be made from non-toxic materials with NO lead paint, PVC, BPA and antimicrobial chemicals. Some options are: cotton lunch bags, BPA-free plastic or unpainted stainless steel. Reuse utensils from home and pack food in reusable, rather than disposable, containers (such as lightweight stainless steel or #1, 2, 4 or 5 plastics).
7. Beverage bottles
Skip commercial bottled water -- it's expensive, wastes resources and the water quality isn't necessarily better than tap. Instead, send your child to school with filtered water and other beverages in a reusable bottle made from BPA-free plastic, BPA-free aluminum or stainless steel, such as Klean Kanteen. Click here to order yours on Amazon. Take a minute to learn more about the downsides of bottled water.
8. Pencils and pens
Pick plain wooden pencils (no paint or glossy coating) made from sustainable wood or recycled newspaper. Skip the scented ones. Try to use recycled ballpoint pens. Find recycled pencils on Amazon.
9. Notebooks and binders
Avoid plastic covers on binders and spiral notebooks; they're usually made from PVC (#3 plastic). Opt for recycled cardboard or natural fibers instead, or look for "no PVC" on the label.
10. Paper products Look for recycled paper, available here, made from at least 30 percent post-consumer waste (PCW) that isn't whitened with chlorine bleach. Or consider virgin paper made from alternative fibers or sustainably managed forests. Choose 100 percent recycled tissues and paper towels made with PCW and without chlorine bleach. Avoid added lotion, fragrance and dyes.
11. Cell phones
A lot of kids have cell phones. If purchasing a new phone, choose one with lower radiation ("SAR" value) by searching EWG's cell phone database. Teach your child that when she's not using it, she should turn it off, store it in her backpack or somewhere else away from the body, and text instead of talking. Get our eight cell phone safety tips.
Get the guide.
You can download these tips, too, 'cause they're mighty handy when you're staring at all those crayons, notebooks, and markers in the store!
Anything gross in YOUR beauty products?
Enviroblog readers are fully aware that there are toxic chemicals in personal care products, and many turn to EWG's Cosmetics Database to find less toxic products.
But how aware are we of the just plain gross ingredients in our personal care products? Find out on this ABC News segment with EWG's Senior Vice-President for Research, Jane Houlihan.
Teaser: There is most certainly beetle juice in your....
Cosmetics safety debate on Democracy Now
It's a busy time for the multi-year effort to make cosmetics safer in the U.S.
In July, the 2010 Safe Cosmetics Act was introduced into Congress and Annie Leonard's videoThe Story of Cosmetics was released.
This recent conversation on Democracy Now - with Stacy Malkan of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (and author of Not Just a Pretty Face) and John Bailey of the Personal Care Products Council - will bring you up to speed on what's going on, and who thinks what about it all.
Not surprisingly, they don't all agree.
EWG is a founding member of the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.
Katy Farber: The Toxic Chemicals in Me
Special to Enviroblog by Katy Farber of Non-Toxic Kids (that's her hair being sampled to the right)
When the nurse came to take my blood, I winced, I moaned, and was generally a big fat baby. It was 10 vials, after all. Then they cut out a chunk of my hair, and I peed in a cup.
Honestly, it was the least I could do. Having written about toxins in toys, vitamins, children's products, and food for two years on my blog, Non-Toxic Kids, well, I needed to put up or shut up, to say it simply.
Because this is personal.
The River Network and the Alliance for a Clean and Healthy Vermont launched a Body Burden Study: A Study of Toxic Chemicals in Residents of the Green Mountain State. Six volunteers (myself included) were tested for several known environmental toxins:
- Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE). These flame-retardants and are associated with affects on thyroid hormones and neurological problems. They are in electronics, mattresses, and furniture. Read EWG's tips to reduce your exposure here.
- Bisphenol-a (BPA): You must have heard of this one. BPA is a chemical found in water bottles, canned food, packaged food linings, canned beverages, food containers and other plastics. In low doses, it has been linked to multiple cancers, obesity, heart disease, disruption of reproductive systems and the process of chemotherapy. Read EWG's tips to reduce your exposure here.
- Organichlorine pesticides: These are insecticides and pesticides. They break down slowly and can remain in the environment and in people for years. DDT is the most well know organichlorine insecticide, which caused damage to wildlife and has been banned worldwide. But there are others still in use and accumulating in our bodies. Learn more on Enviroblog.
- Mercury: The greatest exposure to mercury is caused by ingestion of fish, and mercury is a neurotoxin and may affect the development of the fetus and newborns.
I knew enough about the pollution in people not to be surprised - I grew up in the 80s, when we microwaved everything in plastic, ate conventional produce, and massive amounts of Velveeta and other food-like items. I still had hopes because I spent the last 15 years eating organic (mostly), using safer products, and eating a vegetarian diet. I wanted this to matter. Badly.
And it did, and it didn't.
You see, the folks at EWG are right on when they say we can't shop our way out of this problem. Because despite my commitment to healthy living I had the highest amount of flame retardant chemicals in my blood out of anyone else in the study - 3 to 4 times higher. The chemicals are linked to cancers, brain abnormalities, and other troubling health conditions.
The most troubling?
My two daughters, 3 and 5, live with the same exposures I do, and this level of contamination is unacceptable. We saw it in EWG's umbilical cord studies. No high level of organic and healthy living can leave our children without a heavy chemical load. That is why we must support the Safe Chemicals Act of 2010. There is no logical reason why manufacturers should be able to dump whatever chemicals they want into products without any safety testing, like they've been doing for years.
We've got to pass legislation that shifts the responsibility of safety testing back to the manufacturers and demands safety testing for the 80,000 chemicals that were never tested.
You can read more from Katy on her blog, Non-Toxic Kids. Her first book, Why Great Teachers Quit, was just published in July.
Images by Kurt Budliger Photography.
Support the 2010 Safe Cosmetics Act. It's Urgent.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should have the authority it needs to regulate cosmetics and personal care products - so that you can trust that what you're buying is safe for you and your family.
What will the Safe Cosmetics Act DO?
The recently introduced Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 (H.R. 5786 for the wonks) will greatly expand the powers of the FDA to regulate the ingredients in cosmetics. How?
The agency will be able to prohibit the use of certain ingredients, including carcinogens and reproductive and developmental toxins; recall products that fail to meet safety standards; and require product labels to name each ingredient, including fragrance. Yes, it's ludicrous that none of this is happening now.
We need this legislation - urgently.
Currently, manufacturers may use almost any ingredient or raw material in your soap, shampoo or makeup without government review or approval. According to EWG's research, 22 percent of all personal care products, including children's products, may contain a cancer-causing ingredient, 1,4-Dioxane, and 60 percent of sunscreens contain oxybenzone, a potential hormone disruptor. Other studies have raised alarms about lead in lipstick, secret chemicals in fragrance and preservatives in personal care products.
The status quo is simply unacceptable. We need the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 to ensure that we are able to protect ourselves and our families from potentially harmful ingredients.
If this bill becomes law, Americans will be able to go to the store and buy shampoo, moisturizers, body wash and other grooming products with full confidence they aren't laced with chemicals whose effects on health are unknown or downright dangerous. As it should be.
Read more about the bill here and check your own personal care products for safety here.
Companies that drill for natural gas and oil in the United States are skirting federal law and injecting toxic petroleum distillates (think: kerosene, mineral spirits and a number of other petroleum products that often contain high levels of benzene, a known human carcinogen that is toxic in water at minuscule levels) into thousands of wells, threatening drinking water supplies from Pennsylvania to Wyoming.
Drillers inject these substances into rock under extremely high pressure in a process called hydraulic fracturing that energy companies use to extract natural gas and oil from underground formations.
Private wells and public waterworks are affected
The process, known as "fracking," fractures the rock to allow additional gas and oil to flow to the surface. Fracking is currently used in 90 percent of the nation's oil and natural gas wells and has been instrumental in accessing huge new natural gas deposits trapped in underground shale formations. It's a threat not just for people who have their own wells, but also for major cities such as New York, where everyone is supplied by public waterworks.
They're drilling around the law
Federal and state regulators, meanwhile, have largely looked the other way. See, in 2005 Congress exempted hydraulic fracturing, except fracturing with diesel fuel, from regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Yes, exempted.
Get the story in this short video - then send it to every New Yorker you know. Because if New York gets fracked, it won't be pretty. And the water won't be drinkable.
The risks of fracking aren't just theoretical. Drinking water contamination and property damage have been linked to hydraulic fracturing in four states - Colorado, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wyoming. In one incident that polluted a Colorado creek, nearby groundwater is still contaminated with benzene - six years later.
The conclusion is inescapable: the petroleum distillates used in hydraulic fracturing pose a serious threat to the nation's water supplies, but those risks have been largely ignored by federal and state regulators, including New York.
Being Clean and Pretty Has Toxic Costs
Special to Enviroblog by Nena Baker, author of "The Body Toxic: How the Hazardous Chemistry of Everyday Things Threatens Our Health and Wellbeing"
This morning I relied on a dozen grooming and beauty products to help me face the day.
I used soap, shampoo and conditioner in the shower, and gel and mousse when I dried my hair. I slathered on moisturizer and dabbed my face with sunscreen. I applied foundation, blush and eye shadow. I rolled on deodorant. And I used toothpaste, of course, when I brushed my teeth.
Adults in the United States use an average of 10 personal-care products a day. That translates to exposures to more than 126 unique chemicals, not counting the untold number of chemicals used in any "fragrance" listed on a label, according to the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics.
While some of these chemicals are perfectly safe, others may cause cancer, and problems with brain development and reproduction. This worrisome situation is why three Congressional Democrats -- Reps. Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin -- introduced on the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 on July 21.
The bill aims to give the U.S. Food and Drug Administration the authority to ensure cosmetics and personal-care products are free from harmful ingredients -- authority most Americans probably believe the agency already has.
Yet, under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938, the FDA can't require cosmetics and personal-care companies to substantiate product safety and performance claims. In fact, the FDA can't even require beauty-products makers to register their operations or products, though some do it voluntarily. Indeed, the FDA's legal authority over cosmetics is different from other products it regulates, such as drugs and medical devices, in that cosmetic products and ingredients are not subject to pre-market approval (with the exception of color additives).
While the FDA's mandate when it comes to cosmetics and personal-care products is to ensure that these products are safe, it does not have the statutory power or the resources to complete this important public-health mission.
I was shocked when I learned, through a Freedom of Information Act request submitted while I was writing The Body Toxic, that only 30 employees worked in the FDA's Office of Cosmetics and Colors, which oversees the $60 billion annual U.S. cosmetics business. The office's annual budget of $3.4 million had not increased in some two decades, and did not include funding for safety assessments.
"From lipstick to lotion, our medicine cabinets are filled with cosmetics that may contain potentially dangerous chemicals," said Sen. Markey. "This important bill closes a gaping hole in our federal laws that allows potentially dangerous chemicals to remain in the cosmetic products we use every day."
Even the Personal Care Products Council, the industry's leading trade association and lobbying group, acknowledges the regulatory landscape needs updating. It has lobbied for the last several years to obtain additional funding for FDA's Office of Cosmetics and Colors, said Lezlee Westine, president and CEO.
Predictably, though, the industry does not support the Safe Cosmetics Act as written. And if history is an indicator, it can be expected to fight -- gleaming tooth and polished nail -- against regulatory reforms that would truly give the FDA the broader authority it needs to protect the public.
Nevertheless, as we learn about cancer-causing chemicals in baby shampoo, hormone disruptors in fragrance and lead in lipstick, it becomes hard to accept the lack of safety requirements that gives manufacturers leeway to put harmful ingredients into beauty and personal-care products.
If the Safe Cosmetics Act of 2010 becomes law, we won't have to.
This post originally appeared on Huffington Post.
You can get a copy of The Body Toxic on Amazon. It's a very worthwhile read.
<< Previous